User talk:MCC214/Talk page archive

Active discussions

Blanking other's talk pageEdit

Please explain why you blanking those talk pages? ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, providing an edit summary would be a nice idea. Sorry for interrupting. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Your signatureEdit

Please fix it, it is now linking to content pages. Stryn (talk) 08:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Steward requests/GlobalEdit

Hi, if you want to request global lock for accounts but the request is about a separate issue, please start your separate section. In addition, Fauzty's situation is when a user's behavior not being simple vandalism or spamming, therefore it does not fit into uncontroversial cases, and global ban discussion is the avenue you should take. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 18:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

You did this againEdit

Please don't slip a user for locking like ([1]) this. Please start an RFC for Global Ban instead. Thank you.--AldnonymousBicara? 16:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi. If you start such an RFC about Slowking4, I will support it.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:23, 10 April 2019 (UTC)


Hello, I just give you autopatrolled so patroller and admin don't have to mark your edit as patrolled, but can you make your own userpage?--AldnonymousBicara? 10:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Not marking locked accountsEdit

It would be preferable that you didn't mark accounts as locked, as you did here. Better to just leave them quietly as unmarked graves rather than put some sort of monument on them. And, yes, I know the template exists, though the use of it can be sparing. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:30, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Furthermore, thank you for not removing again my requests for global block. Please take it into account. OT38 (talk) 09:41, 29 June 2019 (UTC)



We have noticed a flux of requests on SRCU initiated by you, and that is far below the standards for the SRCU requests, in terms of quality and quantity we can follow up. When your own community member complains you make bad requests, you have to listen to them and stop this. To that effect, Stewards are requesting you to refrain from participating in SRCU, effective immediately. Failure to follow this request may result in enforcement actions. Thank you.

For the stewards, — regards, Revi 08:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@-revi: I had trimmed down the list of CU to check to a more manageable amount. I think what MCC214 did isn't wrong totally, just over eager to submit them to check where some can be locally handled. I hope the stewards now can know which to focus better. I thank all the work MCC214 had done for zhwp CU requests. --Cohaf (talk) 12:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
You have been blocked for 3 days to enforce this. — regards, Revi 06:33, 30 August 2019 (UTC)


Can you please check out my latest proposal WikiDirect, i could use a few opinions from fellow contributors. Arep Ticous 11:10, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

SRG requestsEdit

Hi. Do you truly believe that the IP block requests are valuable and achievable? I would suggest that you dial back your enthusiasm and look to provide information to stewards that will provide true value in stewards applying blocks where we get the maximum value. At the moment your additions seem more akin to flooding the page, and in the end causing inactivity of stewards to respond to blocks. Any steward has to do quite a significant amount of research prior to blocking a /16 globally, and that investment in time is not demonstrated by your requests in my opinion. I suggest that less requests with better demonstration of the value of the block would be a better use of your time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:17, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst, That reminds me of something... — regards, Revi 02:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
@-revi: Yes, it would be disappointing to have to use a partial block for a good faith editor simply due to an unwillingness to listen and to learn. Perfection is too hard to maintain across a system, we can only do what is reasonable and practicable, c.f. w:Pareto principle.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:17, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Please don't tag LTA user pagesEdit

Please don't create memorials for trolls and LTAs by marking their user pages. If the steward wishes to mark the page,t hen they will. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:02, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

As a further note, going silent and deleting messages is not ideal. For any person who is participating seriously in wikis, the preferred methodology is to have an archive as you really shouldn't have anything to hide. Deleting things is hiding and makes it harder to others' conversations. I would never support such people for extended rights.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Patroller and feedbackEdit

Hi MCC, my apologies for the confusion over me giving you patroller. I did not dig deep enough for applying the right. I have concerns with some of your contributions and I think it is only fair to bring them up as feedback..

I am also concerned with you removing conversations from your talk page without discussing them; this is far from a good idea... ~riley (talk) 11:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Please don't tag locked accountsEdit

Hi. Please do not add {{Locked global account}} to locked accounts. The purpose of the template is to be used by stewards as they choose, not for randoms to go and add at their whim. It is a waste of time and effort and one of those components of feeding the trolls that should be avoided. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:50, 14 January 2020 (UTC)


Hello, I have removed your autopatroller rights per concerns of loss of trust in your edits. Multiple users have attempted to dialogue with you regarding your behavior. If you continue these behaviors, especially while ignoring complaints, you may be blocked or restricted without further warning. If you would like to discuss this further, ping me when you are ready to talk. ~riley (talk) 20:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "MCC214/Talk page archive".